Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Priscila Souza.
Global Ecology and Biogeography | 2014
Edward T. A. Mitchard; Ted R. Feldpausch; Roel J. W. Brienen; Gabriela Lopez-Gonzalez; Abel Monteagudo; Timothy R. Baker; Simon L. Lewis; Jon Lloyd; Carlos A. Quesada; Manuel Gloor; Hans ter Steege; Patrick Meir; Esteban Álvarez; Alejandro Araujo-Murakami; Luiz E. O. C. Aragão; Luzmila Arroyo; Gerardo Aymard; Olaf Banki; Damien Bonal; Sandra A. Brown; Foster Brown; Carlos Cerón; Victor Chama Moscoso; Jérôme Chave; James A. Comiskey; Fernando Cornejo; Massiel Corrales Medina; Lola Da Costa; Flávia R. C. Costa; Anthony Di Fiore
Aim The accurate mapping of forest carbon stocks is essential for understanding the global carbon cycle, for assessing emissions from deforestation, and for rational land-use planning. Remote sensing (RS) is currently the key tool for this purpose, but RS does not estimate vegetation biomass directly, and thus may miss significant spatial variations in forest structure. We test the stated accuracy of pantropical carbon maps using a large independent field dataset. Location Tropical forests of the Amazon basin. The permanent archive of the field plot data can be accessed at: http://dx.doi.org/10.5521/FORESTPLOTS.NET/2014_1 Methods Two recent pantropical RS maps of vegetation carbon are compared to a unique ground-plot dataset, involving tree measurements in 413 large inventory plots located in nine countries. The RS maps were compared directly to field plots, and kriging of the field data was used to allow area-based comparisons. Results The two RS carbon maps fail to capture the main gradient in Amazon forest carbon detected using 413 ground plots, from the densely wooded tall forests of the north-east, to the light-wooded, shorter forests of the south-west. The differences between plots and RS maps far exceed the uncertainties given in these studies, with whole regions over- or under-estimated by > 25%, whereas regional uncertainties for the maps were reported to be < 5%. Main conclusions Pantropical biomass maps are widely used by governments and by projects aiming to reduce deforestation using carbon offsets, but may have significant regional biases. Carbon-mapping techniques must be revised to account for the known ecological variation in tree wood density and allometry to create maps suitable for carbon accounting. The use of single relationships between tree canopy height and above-ground biomass inevitably yields large, spatially correlated errors. This presents a significant challenge to both the forest conservation and remote sensing communities, because neither wood density nor species assemblages can be reliably mapped from space.
PLOS ONE | 2012
Carolina Levis; Priscila Souza; Juliana Schietti; Thaise Emilio; José Luiz Purri da Veiga Pinto; Charles R. Clement; Flávia R. C. Costa
Background Native Amazonian populations managed forest resources in numerous ways, often creating oligarchic forests dominated by useful trees. The scale and spatial distribution of forest modification beyond pre-Columbian settlements is still unknown, although recent studies propose that human impact away from rivers was minimal. We tested the hypothesis that past human management of the useful tree community decreases with distance from rivers. Methodology/Principal Findings In six sites, we inventoried trees and palms with DBH≥10 cm and collected soil for charcoal analysis; we also mapped archaeological evidence around the sites. To quantify forest manipulation, we measured the relative abundance, richness and basal area of useful trees and palms. We found a strong negative exponential relationship between forest manipulation and distance to large rivers. Plots located from 10 to 20 km from a main river had 20–40% useful arboreal species, plots between 20 and 40 km had 12–23%, plots more than 40 km had less than 15%. Soil charcoal abundance was high in the two sites closest to secondary rivers, suggesting past agricultural practices. The shortest distance between archaeological evidence and plots was found in sites near rivers. Conclusions/Significance These results strongly suggest that past forest manipulation was not limited to the pre-Columbian settlements along major rivers, but extended over interfluvial areas considered to be primary forest today. The sustainable use of Amazonian forests will be most effective if it considers the degree of past landscape domestication, as human-modified landscapes concentrate useful plants for human sustainable use and management today.
Journal of Ecology | 2016
Juliana Schietti; Demétrius Martins; Thaise Emilio; Priscila Souza; Carolina Levis; Fabricio Beggiato Baccaro; José Luiz Purri da Veiga Pinto; Gabriel M. Moulatlet; Scott C. Stark; Kelly Sarmento; R. Nazaré O. de Araújo; Flávia R. C. Costa; Jochen Schöngart; Carlos A. Quesada; Scott R. Saleska; Javier Tomasella; William E. Magnusson
A negative relationship between stand biomass and the density of stems is expected to develop during the self-thinning process in resource-limited forests; this leads to a large proportion of the total biomass occurring in large trees. Nevertheless, frequent disturbance regimes can reduce self-thinning and the accumulation of large trees. We investigated size-density relationships and the contribution of large trees (dbh ≥ 70 cm) to stand biomass in 55 1-ha plots along a 600 km transect in central-southern Amazonia. The effects of natural-disturbance gradients (frequency of storms and soil characteristics) and seasonality on forest-structure components (density of stems and mean individual mass) and stand biomass were examined. Contrary to self-thinning predictions, stand biomass increased in forests with higher stem densities. Large trees contained only an average of 5% of stand biomass, and half of the stand biomass was represented by small trees with diameters
Global Ecology and Biogeography | 2015
Lourens Poorter; M. T. van der Sande; Jill Thompson; E.J.M.M. Arets; A. Alarcón; J. Álvarez-Sánchez; Nataly Ascarrunz; Patricia Balvanera; G. Barajas-Guzmán; Alice Boit; Frans Bongers; Fernanda Antunes Carvalho; Fernando Casanoves; G. Cornejo-Tenorio; Flávia R. C. Costa; C. V. de Castilho; Joost F. Duivenvoorden; Loïc Paul Dutrieux; Brian J. Enquist; F. Fernández-Méndez; B. Finegan; L. H. L. Gormley; J.R. Healey; M. R. Hoosbeek; Guillermo Ibarra-Manríquez; André Braga Junqueira; Carolina Levis; J. C. Licona; L. S. Lisboa; William E. Magnusson
Nature Communications | 2015
Sophie Fauset; Michelle O. Johnson; Manuel Gloor; Timothy R. Baker; M Abel Monteagudo; Roel J. W. Brienen; Ted R. Feldpausch; Gabriela Lopez-Gonzalez; Yadvinder Malhi; Hans ter Steege; Nigel C. A. Pitman; Christopher Baraloto; Julien Engel; Pascal Petronelli; Ana Andrade; José Luís C. Camargo; Susan G. Laurance; William F. Laurance; Jérôme Chave; Elodie Allie; Percy Núñez Vargas; John Terborgh; Kalle Ruokolainen; Marcos Silveira; A C Gerardo Aymard; Luzmila Arroyo; Damien Bonal; Hirma Ramírez-Angulo; Alejandro Araujo-Murakami; David A. Neill
Archive | 2013
Nigel C. A. Pitman; Daniel Sabatier; Christopher Baraloto; Rafael P. Salomão; Juan Ernesto Guevara; Oliver L. Phillips; Carolina V. Castilho; William E. Magnusson; Abel Monteagudo; Percy Núñez Vargas; Juan Carlos Montero; Eurídice N. Honorio Coronado; Timothy J. Killeen; Bonifacio Mostacedo; Rafael Leandro de Assis; John Terborgh; Florian Wittmann; Ana Andrade; William F. Laurance; Susan G. Laurance; Beatriz Schwantes Marimon; Ben-Hur Marimon; Ima Célia; Guimarães Vieira; Iêda Leão do Amaral; Roel J. W. Brienen; Hernán Castellanos; Hugo Mogollón; Francisca Dionizia de Almeida Matos; Roosevelt García-Villacorta